belljr
Footballguy
I say there is almost zero chance anyone advances since the 2b was 20ft from the play.I understand that. But play that out a little. I know this isn't what happened, but let's say the runner completely knocked down the fielder and the ball isn't caught. Sure, the batter's out, but runners can still advance. Everyone is all upset about this because the fielder ended up getting over there and making the catch without a problem. But the umpire did and has to make the call right when the interference happens. He doesn't know how it's going to end up. I'm guessing the majority of umpires don't make the call given the situation. Their judgment would be not to call it. I just don't think it's so hair-on-fire black and white that this was some sort of horrible screwup by the umpires.I get where you are coming from but umpires can use judgement in these situations.What were the umpires thinking? Well, to enforce the rules. He interfered. If you don't call it, then what? Just ignore rules whenever? Even if it is a judgment call, you can easily defend the judgment there to call interference. Could you also defend not calling interference there? Sure.What in the world were the umpires thinking here? How does MLB write such ****ty rules
White Sox: MLB questions ump's game-ending call
The Orioles escaped Chicago on a game-ending interference call Thursday night, but MLB told the White Sox it didn't have to go that way.www.espn.com
Love the homer announcers losing their minds when they obviously don't know the rules.
And in this example it was terrible. Why? Because it's an infield fly, no one even has to catch it for the batter to be out.
Also in your scenario he probably should call interference
Again it's a judgement call. MLB even said so.
However, MLB reached out to the White Sox after the game to say that the umpires do have discretion on that play and that interference didn't have to be called, the team confirmed on Friday.